“I tell my guys all the time,” Stoops says, “you’re not the first one to spend a hungry Sunday without any money.”

Thanks, Coach, for that spoonful of sugar.

And before you get all he’s-got-a-point-there on me, John Infante has your rebuttal.

As a policy matter, Stoops appears to not have considered the counter to his argument. The accusation advanced by groups like the National College Players Association is not that players do not get enough. It is that they are going into the red; that the limits on what a full grant-in-aid can pay for impose a cost on athletes that runs into the tens of thousands of dollars over four or five years. Stipends and full cost-of-attendance scholarships are not about pay-for-play. They are well within the NCAA’s definition of amateurism since they cover actual and necessary expenses of being a student-athlete.

The other problem is the perception of a football coach making $4 million a year telling athletes to suck it up and go hungry. Whenever an institution says their problem is messaging, not what they believe but how they communicate it, the institution is roundly criticized. But it is a serious problem for the NCAA. Many of the people attempting to defend the NCAA’s definition of amateurism and whether it is appropriate in college athletics are doing as much damage as the critics.

Beyond that, don’t forget that one of the reasons schools can afford to pay the likes of Stoops $4 million a year is because they’re paying what they are to the hired help in the name of amateurism. I guarantee you Stoops hasn’t.

Bob Stooped has always impressed me as being a punk that shoots his mouth off. He is another of the Golden Boy coaches that was hot once and the media will not let him down, Every year OU is ranked high and every year they screw up at least one or two games. They lost to ND for Dawg sake.

Yep. And seriously make us appear as insensitive , pusillanimous and uncaring while never projecting how players could get paid, maintain an amateur status and not open Pandora’s Box of problems for College Football.

Yes but the pure logic of Big Game Bob’s number theory cannot be refudiated:

“Sam Bradford was one of the most humble and grounded players I’ve ever been around; he got it,” Stoops said. “But I even told him, what makes you think those fans in the stands are wearing No.14 for you? Who says it’s not an old Josh Heupel jersey? I tell our guys all the time. It could be you—or it could be anyone else.”

They call them “Chokelahoma” because they don’t get fed until game time and have to choke down a burger.

Bloviation for the Dawgnation

Quote Of The Day

“It brings back a great Bulldog running back in Thomas who has NFL playing experience and has had success as a college coach at multiple schools. He also inherits a position that has been built to an elite level by Bryan. And it gives Bryan the opportunity to return to coaching the position he played and the one where he cut his teeth serving as a graduate assistant under wide receiver coach John Eason here at UGA. It also provides him with a new experience as a passing game coordinator.” -- Mark Richt, AB-H, 2/16/15